From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stefan Andreatta <s(dot)andreatta(at)synedra(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: autoanalyze criteria |
Date: | 2013-02-22 17:27:18 |
Message-ID: | CAMkU=1x3fWE_tro87xB4MZmqVkR0xKUX+47Nwcu-M2YRA+f_vA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Stefan Andreatta
<s(dot)andreatta(at)synedra(dot)com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If I understand http://www.postgresql.org/**docs/9.1/static/routine-**
> vacuuming.html<http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/routine-vacuuming.html>correctly, the autovacuum threshold in could be estimated like this in
> PostgreSQL 9.1:
>
> SELECT pg_stat_user_tables.relname,
> pg_stat_user_tables.n_dead_**tup,
> CAST(current_setting('**autovacuum_vacuum_threshold') AS bigint)
> + (CAST(current_setting('**autovacuum_vacuum_scale_**factor') AS
> numeric)
> * pg_class.reltuples) AS av_threshold
> FROM pg_stat_user_tables
> JOIN pg_class on pg_stat_user_tables.relid = pg_class.oid
> ORDER BY 1;
>
> If pg_stat_user_tables.n_dead_tup exceeds av_threshold autovacuum should
> kick in. Obviously, that does rely on up-to-date statistics. Is that how it
> is actually done?
>
Pretty much, yes. With the caveat that table storage settings can override
the global settings.
>
> 2nd question: because pg_stat_user_tables.n_dead_tup is itself estimated
> by ANALYZE it cannot be used as a criterion for the next autoanalyze run, I
> think.
n_dead_tup is updated by the stats collector, not by ANALYZE.
Cheers,
Jeff
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Maz Mohammadi | 2013-02-22 17:43:13 | can't access through SSL |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-02-22 17:23:34 | Re: Access a window's frame_end row from a window function |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2013-02-22 17:37:29 | Re: JSON Function Bike Shedding |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2013-02-22 17:14:20 | Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |